Abstract
In this paper we outline different methodologies of propagating the error using bootstrap statistics and analytic approximations using the case example of the Shepody Formation inclination correction. Both techniques are in good agreement and indicate a moderate,15 percent, uncertainty in the determination of the flattening factor (f ) used in the correction.
Such uncertainty corresponds to an 0.31° increase of the confidence cone and a bias that steepens the mean inclination by 0.32°. For other haematite-bearing formations realistic uncertainties for f ranging from 0 and 30 per cent were used (together with an intermediate value of 15 percent) yielding a maximum expected increase in the confidence cones and steepening of the inclinations of 1°.
Such results indicate that formoderate errors of f the inclination correction itself does not substantially alter the uncertainty of a typical palaeomagnetic study.